Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 398EFC0011 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:48:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12CC640298 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:48:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tutanota.de Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iPwWCQbFe88y for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:48:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from w1.tutanota.de (w1.tutanota.de [81.3.6.162]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B02EC4010E for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:48:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from w3.tutanota.de (unknown [192.168.1.164]) by w1.tutanota.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551A4FBF8C6; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:48:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1645436906; s=s1; d=tutanota.de; h=From:From:To:To:Subject:Subject:Content-Description:Content-ID:Content-Type:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:In-Reply-To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:References:Sender; bh=2qXOqg80H9FFtZoH6xcvFCQB4hPLGzbAXtLy/bACJgU=; b=vClBUFncHv3rjhf3+6xrvPZXoe9EgJA7Sp3hkwkxgFLOYRcCfowmtLULVhVJ7uqG ELDX2XxSutheLIfYwQKnLwH7eRd5Jf5/+R1XsqDzVYQdji5msu/p9OYiJnu7lkMjUtF 9DXxNV8Een2jzTgZOw6bCtCLavcAemY6FaDnMIQHTd0MwLwrgxinXhM5gNLsyl4mx+d NDO07I+ctSjerLxCDwHEjzUGwV14aoGWcJNi8rjw/2q8P8MEGbrmrcZrzFW5YqLlER0 ZI32EXdb5X/yo3Bu3TIHOF3p2DdmoyYlVplz9bYmYcfuV6WuPcFKsCq8J+TEAnEVXfs ZnDouZlDJA== Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 10:48:26 +0100 (CET) From: Prayank To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_274367_185987737.1645436906287" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:54:00 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Stumbling into a contentious soft fork activation attempt X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:48:30 -0000 ------=_Part_274367_185987737.1645436906287 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Goog morning ZmnSCPxj, Context: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=48.msg329#msg329 Maybe I should have rephrased it and quote Satoshi. I agree I should not speak for others and it was not my intention in the email. > If Satoshi refuses to participate in Bitcoin development today, who cares what his opinion is? I care about the opinions especially if consensus rules are not changed and remain same as far as subsidy is concerned. > Satoshi is dead, long live Bitcoin. I object to such assumptions about the founder of Bitcoin. Satoshi is more than a pseudonym and will stay alive forever. -- Prayank A3B1 E430 2298 178F Feb 21, 2022, 14:32 by ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com: > Good morning Prayank, > > (offlist) > >> Satoshi >> > > I object to the invocation of Satoshi here, and in general. > If Satoshi wants to participate in Bitcoin development today, he can speak for himself. > If Satoshi refuses to participate in Bitcoin development today, who cares what his opinion is? > Satoshi is dead, long live Bitcoin. > > > Aside from that, I am otherwise thinking about the various arguments being presented. > > > Regards, > ZmnSCPxj > ------=_Part_274367_185987737.1645436906287 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Goog morning ZmnSCPxj,

Context: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D48.msg329#msg3= 29

Maybe I should ha= ve rephrased it and quote Satoshi. I agree I should not speak for others an= d it was not my intention in the email.

> If Satoshi refuses to participate in Bitcoin devel= opment today, who cares what his opinion is?
I care about the opinions especially if consensus = rules are not changed and remain same as far as subsidy is concerned.

> Satoshi is dead, lon= g live Bitcoin.

I ob= ject to such assumptions about the founder of Bitcoin. Satoshi is more than= a pseudonym and will stay ali= ve forever.

--
Prayank

A3B1 E430 2298 178F



Feb 21, 2022, 14:32 by ZmnSCPxj@proto= nmail.com:
Good mor= ning Prayank,

(offlist)
S= atoshi

I object to the invocation of Sa= toshi here, and in general.
If Satoshi wants to participate i= n Bitcoin development today, he can speak for himself.
If Sat= oshi refuses to participate in Bitcoin development today, who cares what hi= s opinion is?
Satoshi is dead, long live Bitcoin.


Aside from that, I am otherwise thinking a= bout the various arguments being presented.

Regards,
ZmnSCPxj

------=_Part_274367_185987737.1645436906287--